I just came into a bit of money and was wondering what you guys all thought - i've already got a D3S and all the new 1.4 primes. I'm basically wondering if you guys all think it's worth the wait until the end of summer to get a D4 or if should invest in some more nice glass.

Given your gear, you should know exactly what you should do with the funds. With that said, the 300 2.8 is an amazing lens and if you have good use for it, then by all means go for it. Otherwise, invested your capital in something that will yield more profit.

If it wasn't tough for you to swing the cost of your present set-up than you should probably be able to afford the 400mm 2.8 which is about as close to a magical lens as you are going to find for a 35mm set-up.

that's the problem - i would have good use for both of them. I'm finding that i'm shooting more and more for newspapers where i'm covering both events and sports, so both a super telephoto and a second body would be beneficial. If i wasn't shooting situations where two bodies were highly effective i would easily go for the 300 2.8, but i am...

first of all don't expect new bodies by the end of summer, more likely end of this year or beginning of the next, especially that nikon is moving the production of FX bodies out of Japan.
second of all, You don't need D3/D4 class camera as a second body, so You could save a little bit and get i.e. d7000 as a backup (sure it's not the same league) and get a used 300/2.8 vr or as squamish suggested go for 400/2.8

In your position, I would spend the money on lenses. Given the current situation in Japan, who knows when the D4 will be announced, much less readily available, while you could get the 300/2.8 right away (in theory anyway, although in practice it might be difficult to find, and may also take a long time in getting in stock).

adamz said:
. . . especially that nikon is moving the production of FX bodies out of Japan.

Where did you hear that, Adam? I didn't see any mention specific to FX body production in the recently reported NR blog. Are you just inferring that conclusion from the Bloomberg story? OP: 300mm f/2.8 FTW!

studio - don't remember where I found that info, but anyway I wouldn't expect new camera (at least in store availability) earlier than by the end of this year. There might be some product announcements during the summer.

adamz said:
studio - don't remember where I found that info, but anyway I wouldn't expect new camera (at least in store availability) earlier than by the end of this year. There might be some product announcements during the summer.

Thanks! So you did hear something specific to FX-body production moving out of Sendai, from a source unrelated to the Notion Vtec F-mount story in Malaysia?

All Nikon FX cameras are made in Sendai but Nikon has several plants in the effected area that make other products. Notion Vtec is only making parts that Nikon's Thailand and China factories need to keep making cameras and lenses at those plants. There's nothing specific yet, just rumors Nikon's pro body production "might" be moving elsewhere.

Despite early reports that the Sendai plant would be operational within a few days after the earthquake and tsunami, that has yet to happen. Nikon "probably" has a back-up contingency plan to move production in case of heavy plant damage after a natural disaster. Fears of radiation contamination might also force a change of plans too.

Thanks, Niko. I would assume that Nikon has contingency plans, or at least may still have enough functional managerial and technical resources to re-stage manufacturing of FX bodies in another plant. They could be back online sooner than we might think, yes? At least that's a possibility. Although I really wanted to wait for a new FX body, I have no idea what's going to happen to current FX-body supply, or how long new product launches may be delayed now, so I bit the bullet and will be picking up a D3s refurb this week (sorry, off-topic).

The D4 sensor is supposed to give you an extra two f stops at equal clarity to the D3s. If that is true you may not need f2.8 lenses. Two more f stops takes f2.8 down to f5.6. Suddenly a "normal" f4.5-5.6 lens should be able to do the same job in low light as an f2.8 does now. That alone can be a tremendous advantage, especially with sports photography. The huge cost for those f2.8 lenses may be obsoleted with the D4 body. How wonderful.

The D4 autofocus module is supposed to be "revolutionary" fast. If that it true it also can be a tremendous advantage for sports photography.

So put your money into the bank or into a stock index fund and at least wait for the official announcement about the D4. Even if you now have a D3s and are happy with it, the odds are you will be far better off putting your money into a D4 which effectively increases the f stop of all your existing lenses two f stops rather than in putting that same money into just one f2.8 lens.

Whoa!! Hold on donaldejose. Back in the day, when Tri-X was a fast film, and I was pushing it to 800 or 1600, I thought life was good with 1.4 and 1.8 lenses. But there was grain, and a lot of it. Now, with digital, we can easily go beyond 800 or 1600, and we still whine for our large aperature lenses. So what if the D4 can go up into the stratosphere on ISO? There still will not be enough light/sensitivity for what I'll want to do next. (Just like 15 years ago, it was argued that 1MB of RAM and a 100MB hard drive would be all one could ever use.) No, large aperature and higher ISOs will always be in demand by someone.

I just came into a bit of money and was wondering what you guys all thought - i've already got a D3S and all the new 1.4 primes. I'm basically wondering if you guys all think it's worth the wait until the end of summer to get a D4 or if should invest in some more nice glass.

warprints: I spoke of need; not want. Sure the fast f2.8 lens will always be in demand by someone but that someone may not be Major Floppis or me. I just finished a season of photographing high school basketball in dimly lit gyms. Using a D7000 because it has the cleanest high ISO image at ISO 3,000 to ISO 6,400 and using a shutter speed from one 320th to one 400th of a second to stop the basketball, I often needed a f2.8 lens. But if the D4 does give us a cleaner higher ISO up two f stops from the D3s then we can set the ISO to 12,800 or higher (whatever still yields a clean image) and drop our f stop from 2.8 to 4 or 5.6 and still do what we had done with the f 2.8 lens. This can allow us to use "normal" lenses and not have to pay huge amounts for special 2.8 lens. I think that would be a great benefit for sports photographers and drastically reduce the cost necessary to freeze sports figures.

The NEED for the 2.8 could disappear for sports photographers. Sure, they can still use it if they want and it may still be necessary to stop motion for certain high speed sports if you will be needing shutter speeds shorter than one 500th of a second.

My point is that the need (as opposed to desire) for the "big" lens may no longer exist. A D4 may be able to freeze action at f4 and one 400th of a second because it may be able to use a high grainless ISO which is two stops higher than the highest grainless ISO of the D3.

We will just have to wait to see how it actually performs when it is released and people get a chance to work with it.

+1 Niko
I have d3s and some 2.8 lenses, and despite of having times around 1/1000 in most situations I decide to go for the 2.8 not because of the amount of light it gaves me but because it allows me to isolate subjects.

Nope i'm not!! Sorry... I have some good friends at various camera stores so i can pick up various items that come in (even when demand is high) fairly easily.

Thanks NikoDoby for monitoring (despite how interesting the conversation had become), basically what i'm asking is which (D4 or 300mm 2.8) will be a better investment if i have equal need(want) of both.

The only person who can answer this is you Major Floppit. Are you willing to wait a year or more for the D4? If you do get a D4 the D5 will replace it in about two years and then the D6 will replace that and then D7 will replace that and so on and so forth. However, I'm still using lenses from the 1970s on my Nikon! So your question doesn't seem like a difficult one to figure out especially since the 300 is real and the D4 isn't.